I do think there needs to be a bit more emphasis on what the actual role of the critic is.

We're critics, not judges. Our job is to point out flaws in a suggestion and to help the OP improve his suggestion. We're not trying to be the gate between Mojang and the suggesters, and only letting those through whom we like. Far too often I see critics judging suggestions based on personal opinion rather than the suggestion's actual merit. Case in point: there was a suggestion a while back to let people dye their weapons. There were various arguments brought up, but the one that irked me the most was one from a few big names in our critic community: "I wouldn't use this, so no support." So what? You think that because you wouldn't, no one else would, despite the huge amount of other games that had this feature? However, they wouldn't think outside their own opinion, and the suggestion faded into obscurity. They judged the suggestion based on their own desires, rather than based on whether the suggestion was actually good or not.

Another problem with this is that many times, a bad suggestion is bashed rather than offered useful input for improvement. Forget suggesters praising there own suggestion, what about critics constantly bashing their suggestion, intentionally or not? It's one thing to point out flaws, it's another for everyone to point out the flaw and not one person offering an idea on how to improve the suggestion. Very often, I see people acting like "This suggestion will never be good, and I'll tell him why." However, if our job is to help others improve their suggestion, then I would think you should only post if you think the suggestion can actually be improved. I personally have the mentality that all suggestions can be improved to the point of implementation (yes, even Herobrine suggestions), so I try to offer positive input at all times, pointing out the flaw, but hinting at how this flaw can be fixed. I also don't post if what I want to say has already been said before.

Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack

Introducing a new series of suggestions, Minecraft 2! Part 5 is (finally) here!

I do think there needs to be a bit more emphasis on what the actual role of the critic is.

We're critics, not judges. Our job is to point out flaws in a suggestion and to help the OP improve his suggestion.

Very often, I see people acting like "This suggestion will never be good, and I'll tell him why."

Critics need to make judgments to do their job. Judgments made on pure opinion, of course, are not very helpful. But if we can't judge a suggestion, then we can't help anyone improve.

Some suggestions cannot be improved no matter how much effort is put into them. This happens when the fundamental concept simply does not fit into what would be best for Minecraft as a whole, or when no matter how you try to balance it it won't be balanced.

Critics need to make judgments to do their job. Judgments made on pure opinion, of course, are not very helpful. But if we can't judge a suggestion, then we can't help anyone improve.

Some suggestions cannot be improved no matter how much effort is put into them. This happens when the fundamental concept simply does not fit into what would be best for Minecraft as a whole, or when no matter how you try to balance it it won't be balanced.

Perhaps I worded that poorly. Yes, we need to judge suggestions, but we shouldn't act like we are the judges for Mojang's preliminary idea board, and thus suggestions should only be in the game if we personally like the idea.

However, I stand by my statement that all suggestions can be added to the game if improved enough. Some will require a lot of improvement, and the idea might have to change and cut a lot of its content, but the core idea can be eventually made good enough for implementation.

I personally think that a good way to provide good, helpful feedback is to pretend you want every suggestion in the game. Then, you'll find it easier to think of ways to improve it as you'd want to give it its best chance. However, judging an idea based on personal ideas means that you've simply condemned a large portion of ideas, which in turn means that you're probably not going to try to improve it.

Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack

Introducing a new series of suggestions, Minecraft 2! Part 5 is (finally) here!

Perhaps I worded that poorly. Yes, we need to judge suggestions, but we shouldn't act like we are the judges for Mojang's preliminary idea board, and thus suggestions should only be in the game if we personally like the idea.

Well, if all things are equal, and we are all judges; then each voice is weighed equally. Meaning that things come down to vote at the end of the day.

I have no problem with anyone being a judge as long as their voice carries as much weight as my own. At the end, even if a judgment is made, who cares?

I get that it gives a pretentious and patronizing air; but there are ways of judging something without coming across as smug and condescending.

Well, if all things are equal, and we are all judges; then each voice is weighed equally. Meaning that things come down to vote at the end of the day.

I have no problem with anyone being a judge as long as their voice carries as much weight as my own. At the end, even if a judgment is made, who cares?

I get that it gives a pretentious and patronizing air; but there are ways of judging something without coming across as smug and condescending.

What I'm trying to say is, we aren't voting. As Mojang doesn't visit or take ideas from this forum, any belief that you are is really just an illusion of grandeur. While I might say "I Support" a suggestion, I essentially just use it as a grading system, with that being the equivalent of an A. I have "supported" multiple suggestions that I wouldn't actually want that much in the game, but I still thought it would be a fun idea to add to the game.

Judging a suggestion does indeed come off as smug and condescending, but I think it more of depends on the suggester than the critic. Critics tend to treat all suggesters with the same level of maturity, even though there are clearly different levels of that on this forum. Sometimes a critic will need to go down to the level of the OP to reach him, even if that means you'll have to be nice.

In the end, I think we all, suggesters and critics, would benefit if we were all to treat each other nicer and with more respect.

Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack

Introducing a new series of suggestions, Minecraft 2! Part 5 is (finally) here!

What I'm trying to say is, we aren't voting. As Mojang doesn't visit or take ideas from this forum, any belief that you are is really just an illusion of grandeur.

We need to be careful how we're defining voting in the first place. In the most basic sense, we are voting. My suggestions have polls, where people literally vote. What we aren't doing is running some kind of process to get things into the game. There is no democracy.

While I might say "I Support" a suggestion, I essentially just use it as a grading system, with that being the equivalent of an A. I have "supported" multiple suggestions that I wouldn't actually want that much in the game, but I still thought it would be a fun idea to add to the game.

I don't understand. Are you just saying you don't feel too strongly about them but support because they're cool? Or are you supporting ideas you don't like?

Judging a suggestion does indeed come off as smug and condescending, but I think it more of depends on the suggester than the critic. Critics tend to treat all suggesters with the same level of maturity, even though there are clearly different levels of that on this forum. Sometimes a critic will need to go down to the level of the OP to reach him, even if that means you'll have to be nice.

I'm actually going to be a bit more hard-line than you here and say people should just, y'know, not treat other people badly in general? Much as I respect your stance that telling 7 year olds specifically that they're braindead is a bad thing, I think we can apply that same principle to any criticism.

In the end, I think we all, suggesters and critics, would benefit if we were all to treat each other nicer and with more respect.

It's one thing to be insulting 7-year-olds (or 10-year-olds, or...). It's another, harder thing to teach them how to present their suggestions better -- essentially, to be part of the village helping to raise them. But for those of us who are adults, that's part of our responsibility, not for the forums in particular, but for society in general. (Of course, some of that is better done in PMs than in forum messages. "Praise in public, criticize in private", and all that.)

I did some CraftTweaker scripts for Mystical Agriculture. They fill in a couple of small gaps in MA, and also let you make or duplicate not only vanilla plants, but the blocks, plants and wood from Quark and Biomes O'Plenty. Also spawn eggs for most vanilla mobs! The scripts are here on Github.

We need to be careful how we're defining voting in the first place. In the most basic sense, we are voting. My suggestions have polls, where people literally vote. What we aren't doing is running some kind of process to get things into the game. There is no democracy.

Well, that's what I'm trying to say. We need to have less of an attitude that we're picking what suggestions we want in the game and more that we're picking which pieces of a suggestion that we like and what should be improved.

I don't understand. Are you just saying you don't feel too strongly about them but support because they're cool? Or are you supporting ideas you don't like?

Well, it's like the dagger suggestion someone posted recently. I don't think that even if the suggestion was implemented I'd use them, simply because that's not my playstyle. However, the suggestion was good, so I gave some feedback and said I support the suggestion.

I never support a suggestion I don't like, but I prefer to not like a suggestion because I don't support it, not the other way around.

Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack

Introducing a new series of suggestions, Minecraft 2! Part 5 is (finally) here!

Well, that's what I'm trying to say. We need to have less of an attitude that we're picking what suggestions we want in the game and more that we're picking which pieces of a suggestion that we like and what should be improved.

They're not mutually exclusive. Right?

I prefer to not like a suggestion because I don't support it, not the other way around.

That doesn't really make sense. Let's be clear liking a suggestions and liking a feature are not the same thing. You can like a suggestion while having no desire to ever use the feature in-game (like the dagger thing). But at the end of the day you still draw your judgement from whether or not you like the suggestion.

If anything it seems like you're playing with semantics to make an unclear point.

I prefer to combine the two together (suggestion and feature). The reason for that is to limit confusion.

I've seen a lot of really good suggestions with features I would DEFINITELY rather not have. I like voicing my distaste for the feature, and "no support" does a good job of ascribing that.

But that's only like 20% of the job; it's important to recognize a good suggestion and give the technical merits all due props. In most suggestions I've nosupped, I found interesting debate with one or more points that have been raised.

With that said, it's an AND gate with me

LIKE CONCEPT/LIKE SUGGESTION - support

LIKE CONCEPT/POOR SUGGESTION - no support

DISLIKE CONCEPT/LIKE SUGGESTION - no support

DISLIKE/POOR - no support

Again, the reason is for transparancy. I like avoiding contradiction where possible and, unfortunately, "Really like your suggestion but horrible feature" can open the air to confusion. Also, if I enjoy the concept but dislike the suggestion, I find it's better to simply support another post with a better implementation/suggestion and link if necessary.

Strictly speaking, no, but I believe that if we want to be helpful, objective critics, we should set our personal desires aside and judge the suggestion on its own merit as well as offer advice for improvement whether or not we like the idea.

That doesn't really make sense. Let's be clear liking a suggestions and liking a feature are not the same thing. You can like a suggestion while having no desire to ever use the feature in-game (like the dagger thing). But at the end of the day you still draw your judgement from whether or not you like the suggestion.

If anything it seems like you're playing with semantics to make an unclear point.

Yeah, I read that again, and I really could have written that more clearly.

Yes, as human beings, we can't really make any decision without some subjective bias. It takes discipline and practice to judge something objectively. When I offer feedback for a suggestion, I am "practicing" my objectivity, so to speak. It is actually possible to change your own opinion on a feature by doing this. Therefore, I try to always see a suggestion initially in a positive light, so that I'll want to offer improvement advice. Once I've given my criticism, though, I have formed my final opinion of the suggestion, and what that opinion is depends on what feedback I gave.

I prefer to combine the two together (suggestion and feature). The reason for that is to limit confusion.

I've seen a lot of really good suggestions with features I would DEFINITELY rather not have. I like voicing my distaste for the feature, and "no support" does a good job of ascribing that.

But that's only like 20% of the job; it's important to recognize a good suggestion and give the technical merits all due props. In most suggestions I've nosupped, I found interesting debate with one or more points that have been raised.

With that said, it's an AND gate with me

LIKE CONCEPT/LIKE SUGGESTION - support

LIKE CONCEPT/POOR SUGGESTION - no support

DISLIKE CONCEPT/LIKE SUGGESTION - no support

DISLIKE/POOR - no support

Again, the reason is for transparancy. I like avoiding contradiction where possible and, unfortunately, "Really like your suggestion but horrible feature" can open the air to confusion. Also, if I enjoy the concept but dislike the suggestion, I find it's better to simply support another post with a better implementation/suggestion and link if necessary.

That's an interesting way to put it, but since I personally use support as a grade, for me it's more like:

LIKE CONCEPT/LIKE SUGGESTION - I Support/Full Support/110% Support
LIKE CONCEPT/POOR SUGGESTION - Partial Support/Minimal Support
DISLIKE CONCEPT/LIKE SUGGESTION - Minimal Support/No Support
DISLIKE/POOR - In theory, No Support, but I've always found some merit in every suggestion.

Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack

Introducing a new series of suggestions, Minecraft 2! Part 5 is (finally) here!

Maybe something on critics giving some thought on what the idea truly is about before supporting something? Just because the idea of a "creepur commander} general1`!" might sound cool, doesn't mean it is. Supporting a bad suggestion can muddy the chance of the OP not understanding what he suggested, and doesn't make improvements because he's now confident of his bad idea.

Also, maybe something on font size, and not using yellow text on a white background forum? Changing the text around is one thing, making it eye-assassination is suggestion suicide.

Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack

Yeah, that guy in the avatar is me. I'm *that* strange. It happens. Sometimes people act like that. Just go with it. I can offer help with suggestions even before you post them - NOT make your suggestions - but help you with them.

Maybe something on critics giving some thought on what the idea truly is about before supporting something? Just because the idea of a "creepur commander} general1`!" might sound cool, doesn't mean it is. Supporting a bad suggestion can muddy the chance of the OP not understanding what he suggested, and doesn't make improvements because he's now confident of his bad idea.

Also, maybe something on font size, and not using yellow text on a white background forum? Changing the text around is one thing, making it eye-assassination is suggestion suicide.

I'm still in the process of a short list of formatting tips for this.

As far as the how to respond to an idea I think it should more or less be like this:

If you like the concept and the execution, you support, obviously.
If you like the concept but not the execution, you can give feedback on what you would change on execution.
If you dislike the concept it really doesn't matter if you like the execution or not (and I would think it would be more or less impossible to dislike the concept but like how it is done), then I think saying that you dislike the core idea is more or less fair. But you should still try and give advice on what could be changed in the core concept to make it better.

Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack

Want some advice on how to thrive in the Suggestions section? Check this handy list of guidelines and tips for posting your ideas and responding to the ideas of others!

Just because the idea of a "creepur commander} general1`!" might sound cool, doesn't mean it is.

I see this stuff usually from the lazy "yes-man" posters or the kiddie kiddie kid kids that don't seem to understand the simplest form of thought-out game design. Both versions of posters having big hearts in their eyes. I mean, you can't really convince to someone to not support what they like, but it still helps as giving something some thought before shouting how "c00l" an idea is can help that same user make a good suggestion themselves.

Another problem some not-deep-thinkers do here is they go "well suggest what makes my idea better then!!! >:(" as if we're meant to fix other people's ideas for them. Some ideas can't be fixed, and it's not our job to do that. It's our job to criticize and maybe suggest improvements if possible, but not to turn poop into gold.

Another problem some not-deep-thinkers do here is they go "well suggest what makes my idea better then!!! >:(" as if we're meant to fix other people's ideas for them. Some ideas can't be fixed, and it's not our job to do that. It's our job to criticize and maybe suggest improvements if possible, but not to turn poop into gold.

However, I stand by my statement that all suggestions can be added to the game if improved enough. Some will require a lot of improvement, and the idea might have to change and cut a lot of its content, but the core idea can be eventually made good enough for implementation.

How much effort is a critic supposed to put into helping someone? I can understand if they came to us for help in a PM, but once you post a suggestion it's out there.

I personally fall more on McRiveter's side of the spectrum. We're here to make relatively small but necessary adjustments. We're not here to revamp huge chunks of suggestions. And some suggestions' core ideas can never be made good enough for implementation.

Maybe something on critics giving some thought on what the idea truly is about before supporting something? Just because the idea of a "creepur commander} general1`!" might sound cool, doesn't mean it is. Supporting a bad suggestion can muddy the chance of the OP not understanding what he suggested, and doesn't make improvements because he's now confident of his bad idea.

Anybody who supports that suggestion won't be reading this thread. Pointless.

Also, maybe something on font size, and not using yellow text on a white background forum? Changing the text around is one thing, making it eye-assassination is suggestion suicide.

That's global. Ask nicely.

On the topic of offering improvements: it's optional but it's optimal. Do it if you can. If you genuinely don't like it no matter what changes, leave it. jdc's "any suggestion can be good enough" argument is strange to me. I'd like to see the theory put into action with a 10/10 suggestion to add Lamborghinis. Or AK47s. Or better yet, something incredibly NSFW. You get the point.

The answer is completely subjective; but I'd say to limit it to 3 different points for the sake of sanity:

First, judge the quality of the suggestion. A quick one-sentence suggestion with little thought isn't really worth much effort to respond to IMHO. If OP doesn't care, why should you. I mean, I get he put in the bare minimum effort to open this lagtastic forum and posted a sentence; but you also put in the effort to open his post and read it. I'd call that a wash. A quality post deserves quality feedback; and in the OP's case, he gets what he pays for.

Second, if the OP becomes recalcitrant or belligerent, stop and DNE. Your effort is wasted; OP is dug in and won't budge.

Third, don't tangent yourself. If you find yourself rambling then it's time to stop and trim your response to inline with the flow of the discussion or in response to OP.

The reason I try to limit a criticism to 3 points of failure is because I want to avoid thread fragmentation and because others will have other criticisms of their own. Even if the suggestion has a TON more flaws; limiting your list to 3 means that the OP can focus on what you perceive as the greatest weaknesses of the suggestion.

I don't know if this is in formatting: add white space.

I don't understand what people have with a single endless paragraph or their fascination with a single enter between paragraphs. It's much easier to read what you write and you don't get lost if there's some white space so people don't get lost forever. Line feeds have existed for longer than Modern English (and Medieval English (and Old English)) as a way to segment a core idea; but instead people decide to stuff their horribly malformed suggestion into a single astonishingly impossible wall of text that defies good taste and reasonable length. White space is a principle form of written communication that even predates a lot of indo-european roots if I recall correctly. At this point, it's enough of a meme (the sociological kind, not the internet kind) that it's practically become human nature to include white space. I mean, I guess people are troubled with the definition of white space, and don't understand that white space means to add at least two line feeds between paragraphs; so maybe I'm using the wrong phrase here. Maybe there's a better way of writing it; but it doesn't even matter for roughly 40% of suggesters that don't understand that you can edit your damn post to put the details you ironed out into it. Instead, it remains as an impenetrable wall of text and the op is too lazy to press a single button and fix it. But I think "edit your post" is already a guideline, so it'd be redundant to add that; but I don't remember seeing anything about white space. One of the only criticisms I've seen is some backwards teachers asking "Are you trying to start a new story?" every time my wife turned in an assignment with line breaks; and the answer is: technically, YES. each individual paragraph is its own story within a larger overarching plot; get over it. It might be a good idea to add that because I really dislike it when people ramble for ages in a single ceaseless paragraph.

How much effort is a critic supposed to put into helping someone? I can understand if they came to us for help in a PM, but once you post a suggestion it's out there.

I personally fall more on McRiveter's side of the spectrum. We're here to make relatively small but necessary adjustments. We're not here to revamp huge chunks of suggestions. And some suggestions' core ideas can never be made good enough for implementation.

Well, as being a critic here isn't really a job, it's not like you have to put any work into criticizing a suggestion. How much effort you put into it is up to you and how much of a dedicated critic you want to be seen as. It's not expected of you to help revamp large potions of a suggestion, but it has happened in the past (I've done so once or twice). Really, just how helpful of a critic are you willing to be at your expense?

On the topic of offering improvements: it's optional but it's optimal. Do it if you can. If you genuinely don't like it no matter what changes, leave it. jdc's "any suggestion can be good enough" argument is strange to me. I'd like to see the theory put into action with a 10/10 suggestion to add Lamborghinis. Or AK47s. Or better yet, something incredibly NSFW. You get the point.

Lamborghinis: New "Modern" texture pack/official add-on for the non-PC editions; replaces minecarts.
AK47s: Could go texture pack or add-on route to replace bows, or could be wielded by enemies in a brand-new dimension.
NSFW: Okay, you got me. Make that "everything that isn't largely offensive can be improved to the point of implementation."

Remember, I didn't say 10/10 or say it would have to go into the PC version, I just said it could become good enough to be feasibly implemented. I don't consider parrots or llamas to be 10/10 features, but they're still in the game. Really, very few suggestions are 10/10.

Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack

Introducing a new series of suggestions, Minecraft 2! Part 5 is (finally) here!

Lamborghinis: New "Modern" texture pack/official add-on for the non-PC editions; replaces minecarts.
AK47s: Could go texture pack or add-on route to replace bows, or could be wielded by enemies in a brand-new dimension.
NSFW: Okay, you got me. Make that "everything that isn't largely offensive can be improved to the point of implementation."

Remember, I didn't say 10/10 or say it would have to go into the PC version, I just said it could become good enough to be feasibly implemented. I don't consider parrots or llamas to be 10/10 features, but they're still in the game. Really, very few suggestions are 10/10.

This section is only for PC edition. And those are still pretty silly ideas. The point is that sometimes we fundamentally don't like an idea and that's okay.